'Senate Republicans have blocked the creation of a bipartisan panel to study the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.'

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Why was there such pressure on women back then to marry? And that no-fault divorce wasn't widespread like today? Not out of deep-rooted misogyny, the way you'd think. Or religious brainwashing. No, it was just the deep love men have for women is understated, like today, for they wanted to make sure they were subject to less pain, suffering, hate crimes, and the like which was life back then. Strength in numbers. Men love women, so we want to try to make sure they don't hurt. But nowadays you'd call that homophobia, since it excludes gay people.

what the blueberry fuck are you talking about and what the Helvetica Standard does it have to do with the subject of this thread

[Thebestoftherest]

HE does like getting off topic so people can't have a real debate or so he can spread his pet peeves to everyone all the time.

[Captain Crimson]

Careful. Those rules are there to help your side too.

Yes, I'd prefer the old-fashioned talking filibuster, like on KOTH, where you gotta stall the vote with words, and thus demonstrate more of who you really are, what you stand for.

You mean the old fashioned talking filibuster that was used to obstruct civil rights legislation and preserve Jim Crow laws? :3

And that Ms. Davis in 2013 used to defend her pro-choice policy. Don't tell me you don't support that, I supported that. Paperwork filibuster is cowardly and anti-democratic. A talking filibuster is democratic. Right and left need to have more talking filibusters.

Again, I find it quite ironic, like many other users here, that for all the talk the left has of championing the stand against tyranny, the fight for "democracy," we wind up erasing actual democratic policies, such as the talking filibuster.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

How is a filibuster inherently democratic or essential to democracy, talking or otherwise?

[Draco Dracul]

No, we're just supposed to accept there's nothing we can do about it and no way to stop it from happening again.

We need to get rid of the filibuster, and frell bipartisanship. Bipartisan action is only useful when both parties are operating in good faith and obeying the rule of law. One party is trying to not use the wrong fork while the other party is trying to enforce a zanier police state over a captive majority.

Careful. Those rules are there to help your side too.

No they aren't, the filibuster is only useful for maintaining the status quo and can never be used to make things better than the already are.

[Captain Crimson]

How is a filibuster inherently democratic or essential to democracy, talking or otherwise?

And you just conveniently ignore what I posted about Ms. Davis, refuse to address that, and so consequently throw her and the pro-choice beliefs you apparently espouse under the bus.

Talking filibusters give you greater liberty to stand up for what you believe in to a public platform. Duh. I find it hilarious the lefties who champion "democracy" over and over wind up wanting to shut down avenues to give impassioned defenses on behalf of the little guy.

Because what you want is a lawless society.

I think it's no wonder you lefties hate real democratic processes, since those can inherently lead to popular tyrant's rule. But if the people have spoken, so be it! In the force of history, it is inevitable, so if Mr. Trump was this age's Julius Caesar, then it was honestly quite tame and you know it.

This is something y'all take for granted in your closed off little morality bubbles.

[Thebestoftherest]

How is a filibuster inherently democratic or essential to democracy, talking or otherwise?

And you just conveniently ignore what I posted about Ms. Davis, refuse to address that, and so consequently throw her and the pro-choice beliefs you apparently espouse under the bus.

Talking filibusters give you greater liberty to stand up for what you believe in to a public platform. Duh. I find it hilarious the lefties who champion "democracy" over and over wind up wanting to shut down avenues to give impassioned defenses on behalf of the little guy.

Because what you want is a lawless society.

I think it's no wonder you lefties hate real democratic processes, since those can inherently lead to popular tyrant's rule. But if the people have spoken, so be it! In the force of history, it is inevitable, so if Mr. Trump was this age's Julius Caesar, then it was honestly quite tame and you know it.

This is something y'all take for granted in your closed off little morality bubbles.

Weren't filibusters used to keep segregation in America?

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Oh but ONE time they were used for a GOOD thing, so it's okay! That proves that LEFTIES HATE democracy, according to CC. They were, in fact, discovered/invented for the purpose of maintaining segregation and Jim Crow.

Democracy is deciding things by votes. Even a talking filibuster is deciding things by who can talk the longest with a very full diaper. You can argue on the merits of the filibuster as a tool for more nuanced debate, or for better processes, but you have not made any case that it's needed for DEMOCRACY to be DEMOCRATIC.

[Captain Crimson]

Weren't filibusters used to keep segregation in America?

That is certainly the downside, but as I illustrated before, there are also advantages to it as well. You're also ignoring segregation back then was quite democratic. It wasn't until the young bleeding hearts of the 1960s that changes.

[Thebestoftherest]

Weren't filibusters used to keep segregation in America?

That is certainly the downside, but as I illustrated before, there are also advantages to it as well. You're also ignoring segregation back then was quite democratic. It wasn't until the young bleeding hearts of the 1960s that changes.

Didn't one guy read a cook book during a filibuster?